Us And Them: How Chicago Carves The Pie

People ask me if I think the next mayoral race will be as tainted with racial venom as the last one. With emphatic certainty I answer, ``Yes! And no!``

``No,`` if Chicago is like most of the 289 cities and towns that have black mayors today. Once the first black mayor gets elected, race usually ceases to be much of an issue.

Harold Washington`s popularity among white voters is twice as high in the polls as it was three years ago and, since the recent special elections, his Hispanic coalition is paying off with a couple of city council votes for which he is quite grateful.

But if Chicago`s battling politicians are as desperate as I expect them to be, the old fears and slurs will be replaced by new fears and slurs, concealed in the rhetoric of ``us`` and ``them.``

You can hear a little in the language used by former Mayor Jane Byrne, the only person so far, besides the easily overlooked Bernard Epton, to actually declare her candidacy.

When she compares the days of her administration (``us``) with the present days (``them``) it sounds as if the city has slipped from the golden age of Rome into the last hours of Pompeii.

Or you can hear it when the city council`s two Eddies, Vrdolyak and Burke, portray themselves as the last line of defense between good, tax-paying citizens (``us``) and the evil tax-crazy mayor (``them``).

Of course, the mayor`s folks will argue back that the only complaints they (``us``) hear seem to be coming from people who no longer enjoy a preferred position at the trough of public jobs and contracts (``them``).

One of those people is Supt. Ed Kelly, of the Chicago Park District, who has been dropping hints of a mayoral run like Mae West used to drop her inhibitions.

Kelly sounded like he was playing by the old rules last month when he told a columnist, ``I think Washington`s the biggest racist I`ve ever seen,`` But he seems to be catching on to the new rules now. When asked on last Sunday`s ``At Issue`` news-panel program on WBBM-AM, to discuss the political significance of the current power struggle over the park district, he slipped into the new ``us`` vs. ``them`` rhetoric with relish--after making a statement that, in the context of Chicago political history, can only be viewed as bizarre.

Kelly: ``Well, politically, y`know, under Mayor Daley, many people would think Mayor Daley would just constantly call you up and tell you what to do with the park district. I can honestly say that Mayor Daley . . . never called me or any of the park commissioners that I knew that we should be doing things to please Mayor Daley. And the park district is a separate municipality . . . ``

Host: ``Then why does Mayor Washington want . . . ?``

Kelly: ``Oh, I`m certain he wants control of everything in Chicago here, y`know. And there`s no question that the number of people, or the small number of people that are around him feel the same way--that they want the parks, they want the CTA (Chicago Transit Authority), they want everything in the City of Chicago. And I think if we ever allow that to happen I think you`re going to see a lot of problems that are going to start out to exist in the park system.``

But notice how Kelly`s references to Washington rapidly shift into a plural ``they`` who want everything and how ``we`` can`t allow that to happen. And who exactly are ``they?`` Well, they aren`t blacks because two out of the three park district board members who stripped Kelly`s powers are white

--and one was a former Kelly ally.

``They`` means more than that. In a divided city like this, the voters make the final choice, once they have decided who ``us`` and ``they`` really are.